MEMO TO:
Status of Women Review Committee
MEMO FROM:
Kathleen Nichol
REGARDING:
Counting Women’s Work: A Symposium
Presented by UNPAC: The United Nations
Platform for Action Committee Mb
May 1, 1999, Brandon, Manitoba
Presentation by Evelyn Drescher: “Counting Unpaid Work”: Evelyn Drescher is
the founder of MAW (Mothers are Women). In 1991 unpaid work was first counted in
Canada, as a result of two court cases. In the first court case, a disabled woman sued for
damages for her inability to work. She was awarded an amount based on 15 hours per
week, at $5.50 per hour wage. In the second case, a man sued because he had lost a
homemaker. According to recent counts, unpaid work amounts to 30.6% to 43% of work
done in Canada. The 30.6% estimates the value of a generalist replacement to do the
tasks a homemaker does. In 1992 women’s work was counted a different way: the value
of the opportunity missed because woman could not be in the work force. This gave rise
to the higher estimation, of 43%.
Why should we value unpaid work? Unpaid work should be valued to improve
the conditions of unpaid workers and for use in policy creation. If the amount and value
of unpaid work is known then the impact of governmental policy changes, such as
cutbacks in health care and welfare, can better be measured.
In the 1996 census people were asked the number of hours per day or per week
spent on unpaid household tasks. Other questions are needed, such as the type of work
being performed and the extent of simultaneous tasks being done.
Ways the value of unpaid work could be counted, fairly:
1. Labour input: The average of the wages plus benefits earned by the lowest paid and
the highest paid would be multiplied times the hours on task.
2. Output method: The household would be seen as a producer. Its production would
be counted by pieces of work done. For example, the number of rooms cleaned, the
clothes washed, children cared for, etc. would be counted and priced. This would
include the informal market, such as cottage industries.
3. Pay equity: Jobs would be evaluated in terms of skill, responsibility, effort, working
conditions. This would allow for inclusion of the management and counselling
aspects of a homemaker. This focuses on the work done, rather than the person doing
it. The hardest job to evaluate is the care-giving. What is the value of a hug?
It is unclear to governments why we need to value unpaid labour. The suggestion
was made that women’s groups need to lobby. MAW presented their rationale to a
traveling committee on finances, on the Thursday before the symposium. Who else
should be lobbied? Statistics Canada, Finance departments, Status of Women
provincial ministers meetings were good suggestions. Use Beijing Plus 5 as a pressure
point. Countries attending the Beijing conference on women’s issues in 1995 made
several resolutions.
One participant was frustrated because the same talks went on in Nova Scotia in
1968. Have we gotten nowhere? Evelyn Drescher noted that Hedy Fry does not know
why counting the value of unpaid labour is important. Having women in government is
not sufficient. Concerned women must educate others.
Another participant noted that in the early 1980’s, she was involved in a project to
count women’s work in farm families. She noted that the hardest sell was to women, not
government.
Evelyn had this advice for those lobbying and educating: Keep discussions
professional. Put out “kitchen table newsletters”. Create “exercises” such as the ball
juggling demo to illustrate women’s many roles. Create a web page on women’s issues.
Educate women’s groups and let them carry the ball to educate others on the value of
counting unpaid labour. Farm women can lobby Ag-Canada. Lobby at hospital closings,
at school closures. Asking questions is NB. “What will happen when …? Who will do
this when …?”
The aims of counting unpaid labour are:
* To remove poverty, economic insecurity, and small pensions, especially for
women.
* To increase access to social benefits for all.
* To provide more flexible maternity leaves.
* To revive to full-force programs for women re-entering the workplace.
* To use prior learning assessment.
* To allow women to apply for credit on their own.
* To eliminate discrimination against homemakers who stay at home caring for
their parents and children and as a result have reduced pensions because they were out of
the paid workforce.
Workshop on “Costs and Benefits”: This workshop explored some of the financial
issues faced by women working inside and outside the home- issues including taxes,
pensions, child care, social assistance and workfare – as well as exploring the broader
issue of nations costs when work in unvalued and undervalued.
We were asked to think of stress times, financially and work-related. Then we
were asked to answer what would it be like if these weren’t there. Sort of “What is your
vision of utopia”? Finally, we were asked to answer “What needs to change”?
To the last question here are a few of the responses. Society must value children.
[Parents are “building social capital”. The children are the future economy of our
country.] Women want power in decision making that affects their lives. Talk about
links between the loss of the social security network and the consequences. Work on
attitude changing. Statistically count consequences and costs of cuts of the social
security network. Include concerns of young women and of women over sixty-five, as
well as those with families. Perhaps have a federal law that “someone must stay home
with children under 12” perhaps. Perhaps receive a tax deduction for caring for children.
Perhaps have EI benefits for at-home spouses,and disability pay for homeworkers. Never
doubt that a small group can change the world. [A pay cheque is security.]
Presentation by Shelagh Day: co-author of “Women and the Equality Deficit: The
Impact of Restructuring Canada’s Social Programs”: spoke on the connection
between human rights and women’s rights. Spoke on Canada’s restructuring of social
programs and the effect this is having on women. Spoke on the international context for
women’s work.
Her five propositions:
1. Women’s poverty and economic inequality are gendered.
2. Government policies hurt women. To promote women’s equality need government
intervention.
3. Social programs relieve stress on women and are thus NB.
4. Women’s right to equality is a full and encompassing right, including economic
equality.
5. Economic policies and human rights commitments are connected!
History:
Medicare: was introduced in 1968, and in place in 1971. Federal government paid 50%
of cost of medicare put on by provinces.
In 1984 Canada Federal Health Act medicare programs had to be:
(i) universal
(ii) comprehensive
(iii) portable
(iv) publicly administered, not privately.
(v) accessible to all (no extra costs)
If not, the federal government could withdraw funding. This is still in place.
Social Assistance: in 1966 the Canada Assistance Plan (CAP) was introduced. A unified
assistance program. Federal government paid 50% of cost of social assistance programs
put on by the provinces. It said:
(i) any person in need was entitled to financial assistance
(ii) with no residency requirement
(iii) at a minimum level of needs met
(iv) could refuse to work (so could stay home with children, for example).
It paid for homemakers, attendants for disabled, childcare, job re-entry training, women’s
shelters, counselling and referral in crisis, respite care, civil legal aid.
As of 1995, with the Federal Budget Implementation Act, this is all gone. CAP was
repealed. All that remains is the “no residency requirement”.
Canada Health and Social Transfer (1995):
Health, social assistance, post-secondary education are all as one lump sum
transferred to the provinces. There are no requirements about how much is spent in each
area, and in social assistance, there are no federal requirements about programming to
receive funding. Social assistance is one of the most variable cost areas, dependent on
the economy so much. It tends to be the one cut, then.
Also, the transfer payment was cut by $6.6 billion (or was it $0.6 billion).
There is no 50%/50% cost sharing incentive anymore.
No federal influence anymore.
Consequences: Welfare cuts, up to 35% for single persons in Nova Scotia; 10% less in
Manitoba; women’s shelters closing in Ottawa; health care and education cuts.
Why does it affect women most?
Women are poorer.
Over 90% of single mothers with kids are under the poverty line.
The majority of social assistance recipients are women.
70% are women and children.
Women earn 56% of what men earn; women receive 58% of the amount that men
receive in pension; women hold 70% of the non-traditional jobs (part-time, no benefits).
Women with disabilities or of colour are even more disadvantaged.
After divorce women get poorer, men get better off.
Thus poverty is gendered. Needs some non-gendered solutions.
Women and children need this safety net!
Cuts to health care increase the load on women (usually), and cut some of
women’s best jobs – nursing positions.
Cut backs are phrased as deficit reduction, but in reality are an assault on
women’s equality!
The Social Union Framework:
In January 1999 the “Social Union Framework” was “handed out” by
government. It was not done in parliament! No participation. It will only be reviewed in
three years time. It removed any way to create common standards across the country.
Maybe these could happen in a new program.
Accomplishments:
1. In Geneva in November 1998: International Treaty on Adequate Standard of Living,
health care, social security, trade unions. (The National Association on Women and
the Law went). The International Commission said “ we don’t understand how
Canada can have such poverty for females, single mothers, and aboriginals!” They
chastised Canada. They said “cuts to social programs hurt women!”
2. In New York in March 1999: “International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights”
– an honoured and respected body. Chastised Canada for social program cuts.
Future tasks needed to restore the social security network:
* Need in-roads into the traditional mindset about what human rights means.
* 1970 was the last analysis of women’s equity in Canada. Need to do it again (a
commission).
* Government reps need to understand the poverty situation. Have no concept
what is means to live on $600 a month. Perhaps “walk in the shoes” of a low-income
worker for a time!
* Need to convince the public that poverty is costly! It has repercussions!
* We do have power in elections. Then politicians do listen! Ask questions of
candidates.
* Use Internet for our sharing.
What is needed?
Need social rights for men and women: a living wage, “flexible” employers,
benefits back, not to be taken for granted by husbands, kids, and communities.
Workshop: Uncounted Work: Invisible women: When women’s work isn’t
counted, how does this affect the rights of women and their inclusion in public
policy? We were given four scenarios of women: immigrant, aboriginal, single mother,
and …(I missed the last one). Our group considered an immigrant woman with children
and a spouse. We identified several potential stressors: no women friends, no family
nearby, perhaps not understanding the language, new customs, new standard of living,
perhaps need to work, perhaps work is low paying, the work may be much less than she
is qualified for, frustrations of finding schools for kids and helping kids fit in, maybe
spousal abuse, fear of reporting spousal abuse because spouse is wage earner, need to
find own church, unsure where to ask for help and what services she is entitled to, high
cost of everything! We identified several sources of help: low income housing, second
hand clothing stores, women’s shelters, multicultural centre. However, we recognized
the dire need for a social security network for such a situation.
Conclusions:
Network.
Educate ourselves and others.
Have “mother” as an occupation at career days.
Talk about what matters to you.
Act with dignity and genuineness.
Ask questions of decision-makers.